3 Athletics: Topics State Athletic Association s Enforcement of Anti-recruiting Rule Did Not Violate Private School s First Amendment Rights Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Ass n v. Brentwood Academy (U. S., 127 S. Ct. 2489), June 21, Private high school brought Section 1983 action against state interscholastic athletic association, asserting free speech and due process challenges against rule prohibiting undue influence in recruitment of middle school students for athletic programs. The United States Supreme Court held that enforcement by state interscholastic athletic association of its anti-recruiting rule, which prohibited high schools from using undue influence to recruit middle school students for athletic programs, did not violate First Amendments rights of private high school. The case was created when a football coach at a private school, a voluntary association member, sent letters inviting selected middle school students to attend football spring practice sessions. Furthermore, the anti-recruiting rule furthered the association s interests in managing an efficient and effective state sponsored high school athletic league. Wheelchair Racer Not Discriminated Against During Track Meet McFadden v. Grasmick (D. Md., 485 F. Supp. 2d 642), May 12, High school student-athlete, who used a wheelchair, sued state education officials and their agents and designees. She claimed they unlawfully discriminated against her in violation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Rehabilitation Act), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and Section 1983 because their rules and protocols for assignment of team points in a state-wide track and field competition precluded her from earning points for her team. Plaintiff, a high school junior at the time of the suit, had spina bifida and was paralyzed from below the waist since early childhood. She used a wheelchair for mobility, and by all accounts was a highly skilled, indeed, a world class and Olympic wheelchair racer ( a wheeler ). Additionally, she was eligible for the interscholastic athletic program and was a full member of her high school s track team. Plaintiff participated in four track events (e. g. discus and shot put) at the 2006 regional and statewide track and field tournaments. However, plaintiff s name, unlike the names of other athletes, was not announced as she crossed the finish line during her race events. In addition, her name was not illuminated on the score board when she finished her races. Furthermore, the plaintiff was not permitted to earn points for her team in any of her races. The United States District Court, D. Maryland, ruled that plaintiff was not entitled to preliminary injunctive relief because it was unlikely she would be able to demonstrate that she was discriminated against under current statutes. 3

4 Civil Rights: Teacher Limited Lifting Was Not a Disability Stockton v. A. World of Hope Childcare Learning Center (S. D. Ga., 484 F. Supp. 2d 1304), April 20, Plaintiff (26 years of age) was hired to work as a teacher in a childcare facility. When she was an infant, she had an allergic reaction to a DPT vaccination, which caused her to develop problems in her leg muscles. During the summer of 2004, she was employed by the World of Hope Childcare Learning Center. During the employment process, she told the administration that she could perform all the work they had described for her. Furthermore, she indicated no physical limitations on her application for employment. In early 2005, she indicated to the administration of the childcare facility that she could no long perform duties such as the following without reasonable accommodation: lifting toddlers from their cribs; placing infants on a changing table; lifting and carrying a mop bucket; or lifting and carrying a vacuum cleaner. Additionally, she stated that she could no longer walk on uneven surfaces; stand or walk in the sand portion of the playground; nor physically run after children while supervising them on the playground. On May 12, 2005 she resigned from her teaching position. Plaintiff claimed that the school s administration constantly harassed her due to her physical limitations. She further claimed that the administration at the childcare facility did not make reasonable accommodations for her disability and created a hostile work environment. The United States District Court, S. D. Georgia, Augusta Division, held that: (1) Employee was not disabled under the American Disability Act (ADA); (2) Employer did not consider employee disabled; and (3) Employee was not qualified to perform the duties from which she was removed. 4

5 Principal Confiscating Banner Stating Bong Hits 4 Jesus Not Unconstitutional Morse v. Frederick (U. S., 127 S. Ct. 2618), June 25, On January 24, 2002, the Olympic Torch Relay passed through Juneau, Alaska, on its way to the winter games in Salt Lake City, Utah. The torchbearers were to proceed along a street in front of Juneau-Douglas High School (JDHS) while school was in session. Deborah Morse, the school principal, decided to permit staff and students to participate in the torch relay as an approved social event or class trip. Students were allowed to leave class to observe the relay from either side of the street. Teachers and administrative officials monitored the students actions. Plaintiff, Joseph Frederick, a JDHS senior, was late to school that day. When he arrived, he joined his friends (all but one of whom were JDHS students) across the street from the school to watch the event. Not all the students waited patiently. Some became rambunctious, throwing plastic cola bottles and snowballs, and scuffling with their classmates. As the torchbearers and camera crews passed by, Frederick and his friends unfurled a 14-foot banner bearing the phrase: BONG HITS 4 JESUS. The large banner was easily readable by the students on the other side of the street. Plaintiff received a 10 day suspension for displaying the banner. Thereupon, he claimed that his First Amendment rights had been violated. The United States Supreme Court held that Frederick was attending a school sponsored activity and his suspension from school for did not violate his free speech rights under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The event occurred during school hours, was an event sanctioned by the principal, and teachers and administrators were interspersed among students providing supervision. Furthermore, the event fell under school board policy (student handbook) as an approved social event or class trip. Therefore, school policies and associated school rules applied. 5

6 School District Not Entitled to Summary Judgment Regarding Students Harassment Bruning ex rel. Bruning v. Carroll Community School Dist. (N. D. Iowa, 486 F. Supp. 2d 892), April 19, Parents (plaintiffs) of three female middle school students, on behalf of their daughters, filed a complaint against school district, district superintendent, middle school principal, and middle school assistant principal alleging sexual harassment in violation of Title IX and Section The plaintiffs alleged that three male students sexually harassed their daughters by grabbing their breasts, grabbing their buttocks, kicking their buttocks, poking them in their lower private areas, spitting on them, pulling their hair, scratching their necks with staples, giving them titty twisters, pulling their heads down to the boys crotches, throwing spitballs at them, poking their crotches with pens and pencils, and calling them sluts and whores. The United States District Court, N. D. Iowa, Central Division, held that: (1) Recipients of federal funding may be liable under Title IX for student-on-student sexual harassment, and plaintiff bringing such a claim is required to establish the following: (A) funding recipient had actual knowledge of sexual harassment in its program or activities; (B) funding recipient was deliberately indifferent to sexual harassment, and harasser is under funding recipient s disciplinary authority; and (C) harassment was so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively bars victim s access to an educational opportunity or benefit. (2) To establish a Title IX claim on the basic of sexual harassment, plaintiff must show (as applied to this case) that: (A) plaintiff is a student at an educational institution receiving federal funds; (B) plaintiff was subjected to harassment based on her sex; (C) the harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile or abusive environment in an educational program or activity; and (D) there is a basis for imputing liability to the institution. Thus, (3) Fact issues as to reasonable foreseeability of injury to female students (plaintiffs) from male students physical, verbal, and sexual misconduct on school property precluded summary judgment for school district on plaintiffs liability claim. 6

7 Desegregation: Using Race As A Factor In Assigning Students To Schools Was Unconstitutional Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School Dist. No. 1 (U. S., 127 S. Ct. 2738), June 28, Parents in the Seattle, Washington, school district brought action against school district challenging, under the Equal Protection Clause, student school assignments that rely on racial classification. In separate action, a Kentucky parent brought a similar suit against a school board in the state of Kentucky who used racial classification in their plan for elementary school student assignments. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari (Supreme Court decided to hear both cases and directed the lower court to deliver the records for review) in both cases. After reviewing the two cases, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled: (1) Parents had standing to challenge, under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, school districts use of racial classifications in student assignment plans that relied on racial classification to allocate slots and admission status; and (2) School districts failed to demonstrate that the use of racial classifications in their student assignment plans was necessary to achieve their stated goal of racial diversity. Furthermore, school districts failed to show that they considered methods other than explicit racial classifications to achieve their stated goals. Disabled Students: Student Not Entitled to Special Services Based on Specific Learning Disability Hood v. Encinitas Union School Dist. (C. A. 9 {Cal.}, 486 F. 3d 1099), May 11, Student and her parents brought suit against school district in what they perceived as a violation of IDEA and deprivation of educational services. Plaintiffs sought reimbursement for private school education after withdrawing their youngster from public school. They assert that: (1) their daughter exhibited a severe discrepancy between her achievement and intellectual ability in one or more academic areas; and (2) their daughter had other health impairments. The United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, held that student was not entitled to special education based on an other health impairment, in the form of a seizure disorder or attention deficit disorder. Any other health impairment that student did suffer did not adversely affect her performance to the extent that she required education outside of the general classroom. 7

8 Finance: Legislative State Funding of Public Schools Unconstitutional Lake View School Dist. No. 25 of Phillips County v. Huckabee (Ark., 220 S. W. 3d 645), December 15, The Supreme Court of Arkansas held that: (1) General Assembly (state legislature) inaction with respect to legislative act prescribing a framework for determining foundation funding amount for school year violated state constitutional funding requirements (Vital information relating to existing school district revenues, expenditures, and needs was not reviewed.); (2) Upon determination that the General Assembly inaction with respect to determining public education funding needs violated constitutional school funding requirements, the Supreme Court would not direct General Assembly to appropriate a specific increase in funding amounts. It was the duty of the General Assembly to determine funding levels; and (3) Under the constitution of the state of Arkansas, the state must provide a general, suitable, and efficient system of public education to the children of the state; and it is the duty of the Supreme Court to ensure constitutional compliance when that compliance is challenged. 8

9 Freedom of Speech: School Officials Violated Student s Freedom of Speech in Responding to His Editorial Smith v. Novato Unified School Dist. (Cal. App. 1 Dist., 59 Cal. Rptr. 3d. 508), May 21, During the school year, Smith was a senior at Novato High School, enrolled in a journalism class. As part of the class the students published a school newspaper called The Buzz. The class elected Smith Opinion Editor of the first issue of The Buzz. Smith wrote an opinion editorial on illegal immigration entitled Immigration. It included statements such as the following: (1) I ll bet that if I took a stroll through the Canal district in San Rafael that I would find a lot of people that would answer a question of mine with que?, meaning that they don t speak English and don t know what the heck I m talking about. (2) Seems to me that the only reason why they can t speak English is because they are illegal. (3) If a person looks suspicious then just stop them and ask a few questions, and if they answer que?, detain them and see if they answer que?, detain them and see if they are legal. (4) Criminals usually flee here in order to escape their punishment. Before publication, the teacher and principal reviewed the publication and allowed it to be published in The Buzz. Several Latino parents got upset over the publication and met with the principal and other school officials. In late January or early February 2002, Smith submitted a second editorial entitled Reverse Racism. The piece contained many provocative statements about race relations. Both the teacher and principal approved the piece for publication in The Buzz. However, the principal thought it would be a good idea to publish a counter-viewpoint along with Reverse Racism. Because there was insufficient time for someone to write a counter-viewpoint before publication of the February 2002 issue of The Buzz, the journalism students voted to move the editorial to the next issue of the paper. In the interim, Reverse Racism was published in the Novato Advance, a local newspaper not affiliated with the school district. Reverse Racism was published in the May 2002 edition of The Buzz, along with a counter-viewpoint entitled It s About Time. Plaintiff filed suit alleging violation of his right to free speech under the United States and California Constitutions. He sought an injunction prohibiting further illegal infringement of speech and a nominal damage of $1.00. The California Court of Appeals, First District, Division 5, held that: (1) Student s editorial was protected speech; and (2) School officials violated student s constitutional and statutory rights to exercise freedom of speech. Note: The Court based it decision partially on the following concepts: (1) the editorial was not speech likely to incite disruption of the orderly operation of the high school; (2) it contained no direct provocation or racial epithets; and (3) piece did not incite other students to create a clear and present danger. 9

10 Records: Claims Filed by Student s Attorneys Pertaining to Janitor s Sexual Assault of Student Was Public Record Phoenix Newspaper, Inc. v. Ellis (Ariz. App. Div. 1, 159 P. 3d 578), June 12, On August 25, 2006, police arrested a school janitor on suspicion of assaulting Doe, a 14 year-old student at a Scottsdale, Arizona, high school shortly after the end of the school day. The suspect was later indicted on charges of kidnapping, sexual conduct with a minor, public sexual indecency to a minor, and sexual abuse. The events were the subject of several articles in the Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. (PNI) newspaper. One of the articles reported that the school district held a public meeting to address parents concerns about school safety and plans for new security procedures. The Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division 1, Department A, ruled that under Arizona s public records law, notice of claim that high-school student s attorney filed with the school district regarding her alleged sexual assault by a school janitor was public record, although notice was submitted in confidence. Furthermore, the school district s potential liability was of great concern to the public, along with the amount of money the plaintiff might consider in settling the suit, and could have been of genuine interest to the public. Newspaper Had Right to Inspect School Board s Records Pertaining to Imposition of Student Discipline Board of Trustees, Cut Bank Public Schools v. Cut Back Pioneer Press (Mont., 160 P. 3d 482), May 8, On September 26, 2005, The Board of Trustees, Cut Bank Public Schools (Board), held a properly noticed meeting to determine whether two students of the Cut Bank Public Schools should be disciplined for their part in shooting other students with plastic BBs on school property; and, if so, what discipline should be imposed. Members of the public, including a representative of the Cut Bank Pioneer Press (Pioneer) attending the meeting. The Supreme Court of Montana, held that: (1) Newspaper (Pioneer) had standing to file petition to trial court to inspect school board s records concerning imposition of the discipline records regarding the two students who were involved in the shooting incident. The records were necessary for the newspaper s work, the newspaper voiced a genuine interest in only redacted (edited or arranged in proper form for publication) student disciplinary records, and school board s failure to provide records injured newspaper s ability to exercise its constitutional right to know actions taken by government and its freedom of the press to report such actions of government; and (2) Federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) does not prevent the public release of redacted student disciplinary records. Note: Newspaper did not request the names of the students and specifically asked that the student be identified by assigned numbers or that the names be redacted (edited out). 10

11 School Boards: School Board Not Liable For Teacher s Sexual Assault of Student Bailey v. Orange County School Bd. (C. A. 11 {Fla.}, 222 Fed. App. 932), April 5, The United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit, held that school board was not liable under Title IX and Section 1983 for high school teacher s alleged sexual harassment of former student, absent evidence that a school board official knew of the teacher s misconduct with that student, or similar conduct with other students, and was deliberately indifferent to such conduct. Torts: School Officials Failed to Exercise Reasonable Supervision and Care for Student s Safety Jerkins ex rel. Jerkins v. Anderson (N. J., 922 A. 2d 1279), June 14, Third-grader attended an elementary school which was a walking school due to no school bus service. Thus, all students walked to and from school with an adult, family member, or a babysitter; were transported to and from school by a family member or another adult; or were enrolled in an after-school program. Normally, school dismissed at 2:50 p.m. However on the day of the accident, school was dismissed at 1:30 p.m. and Joseph (plaintiff) left school grounds, played with friends, and may have gone swimming. At 3:50 p.m. he was struck by a vehicle at an intersection several blocks from his school and in a different direction from his home. The accident severely injured Joseph, rendering him a quadriplegic. The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that: (1) School officials have a duty to exercise reasonable care in supervising students; and (2) School officials have a duty to create a reasonable dismissal supervision policy, provide notice to students parents/guardians of that policy, and comply with their policy. School Board Entitled to Immunity Following Attack on Elementary Student Leake v. Murphy (Ga. App., 644 S. E. 2d 328), March 26, Parents of 10-year-old elementary school student who was injured (hit in the head with a hammer) in an attack by a psychologically disturbed individual s entry into Mountain Park Elementary School brought negligence action against school board, its individual members, school principal, school staff members, and school superintendent. The Court of Appeals of Georgia held that Georgia s statute providing that school districts were to have school plans prepared with the involvement of parents, students, teachers, and others created a discretionary duty, rather than a ministerial duty. Therefore, any failure by school district, school board, or superintendent did not deprive them of official immunity from tort claims arising when student was injured in an attack by a stranger on school property. The elementary school had a school safety plan prepared and in place prior to the accident; but the plan was not formally adopted by the school board. However, the school s plan had been submitted and approved by the Georgia Emergency Management Agency (GEMA). 11

12 School Did Not Breach Its Duty to Supervise Kindergarten Student Injured on Hay Ride David v. City of New York (N. Y. A. D. 2 Dept., 835 N. Y. S. 2d 377), May 1, On October 16, 2003, the infant plaintiff, a kindergarten student in the defendant school district, was injured during a hay ride on a school field trip to the Green Meadows Farm in Floral Park. The plaintiff cut her eyelid when the large wagon in which she and others rode hit a bump and threw her from her seat to the floor of the wagon. One supervisor was sitting next to the student at the time of her injury, and another was sitting across from the plaintiff. In addition, there were 12 other adult supervisors present with the approximately 40 kindergarteners. The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, held: (1) a school did not breach its duty of supervision; and (2) a school is not an insurer of the safety of its students. However, a school is charged with the obligation to exercise such care over students that a parent of ordinary prudence would exercise under comparable circumstances. City Was Not Entitled to Summary Judgment Suit Filed By Baseball Coach Who Was Struck in the Face by a Foul Ball Reyes v. City of New York (N. Y. Sup., 835 N. Y. S. 2d 852), March 12, Triable (liable to a judicial trial) issues of fact as to whether city was chargeable with knowledge of the lack of protective fencing for baseball field dugout existed, as to the city s obligation to exercise reasonable care when a high school baseball coach was struck in the face by a foul ball while coaching from inside the third-base dugout. Therefore, summary judgment was precluded for the city. Note: Johnny R. Purvis is currently a professor in the Department of Leadership Studies at the University of Central Arkansas. He retired (30.5 years) as a professor, Director of the Education Service Center, Executive Director of the Southern Education Consortium, and Director of the Mississippi Safe School Center at the University of Southern Mississippi. Additionally, he serves as a law enforcement officer in both Arkansas and Mississippi. He can be reached at the following phone numbers: (office) and (cell). 12

13 February 2008 (#s 557 & 558) Legal Update for District School Administrators February 2008 Johnny R. Purvis* West s Education Law Reporter September 6, 2007 Vol. 221 No. 1 (Pages 1 457) September 20, 2007 Vol. 221 No. 2 (Pages ) Terry James, Chair of the Department of Leadership Studies Jack Klotz, Program Coordinator of Leadership Studies Shelly Albritton, Technology Coordinator Leadership Studies Wm. Leewer, Jr. Editor, Mississippi State University Safe, Orderly, and Productive School Institute Department of Leadership Studies University of Central Arkansas 201 Donaghey Avenue 316 Torreyson West Conway, AR *Phone: (office) The Legal Update For District School Administrators is a monthly update of selected significant court cases pertaining to school administration. It is written by *Johnny R. Purvis for the Safe, Orderly, and Productive School Institute located in the Department of Leadership Studies at the University of Central Arkansas. If you have any questions or comments about these cases and their potential ramifications, please phone Johnny R. Purvis at * In addition, feel free to contact Purvis regarding educational legal concerns; school safety and security issues; crisis management; student discipline/management issues; and concerns pertaining to gangs, cults, and alternative beliefs. 1

14 Topics: - Civil Rights - Compensation and Benefits - Disabled Students - Labor and Employment - Security - Student Discipline - Torts Commentary: - No commentary this month. Topics Civil Rights: Student s Free Speech Rights Violated M. B. ex rel. Martin v. Liverpool Cent School Dist. (N. D. N. Y., 487 F. Supp. 2d 117), March 30, While in the third grade (Fall 2003), plaintiff handed out approximately 20 religious Halloween tracts to friends during lunch period. Once her teacher learned of the incident, the student was instructed not to do so again or she would be in big trouble. The following April, the student handed out religious tracts entitle Cleo to her friends during recess or lunch time. Later on during the same day when the tracts were handed out, the student s principal called her mother and told her that her child could not hand the tracts out at school. Student s mother filed suit against the school district, claiming school officials violated her child s First Amendment right pertaining to freedom of speech, Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. A United States district court in New York held that the student s free speech rights were violated, in that the student had the right to pass out the religious tracts during non-instructional time, and that school officials were not endorsing flyer s content by allowing her to give the tracts to her friends. Additionally, there was no evidence that the flyers caused any disruption of the school day, nor that the passing out of the flyers invaded the rights of others. 2

15 Cell Phone Ban Upheld Price v. New York City Bd. of Educ. (N. Y. Sup., 837 N. Y. S. 2d 507), May 7, Parents and parents advisory council commenced declaratory judgment against the New York City Board of Education, seeking to strike down the board s policy that prohibited students from possession of cellular telephones ( Cell Phones Rules ) in public schools without authorization from designated school officials. The Supreme Court, New York County, held that: (1) policy banning possession by students had a rational basis, since possession ban would lead to less disturbance of the educational mission of the school district than would an use ban; (2) policy did not violate any fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children, or their federal or state constitutional rights; and (3) banning cell phones on school property did not fundamentally prevent communications between parents and their children. Student Stated a Valid First Amendment Challenge Pertaining to Wearing Her Necklace Grzywna ex rel. Doe v. Schenectady Cent. School Dist. (N. D. N. Y., 489 F. Supp. 2d 139), March 7, In early January 2005, middle school student wore to school a red, white, and blue beaded necklace that she made. According to the plaintiff, she wore the necklace to show her support for the soldiers serving in Iraq (including members of her family) and to demonstrate her love for her country. On January 4, 2005, school officials informed the plaintiff that she could not wear the necklace because it could be considered to be gang related. School district policy prohibited the wearing of gang related items. The student was advised that if she did not comply with school policy, she would be subjected to discipline. Thereupon, the student commenced action against the school district. The school district requested that the court dismiss the suit on grounds of the Eleventh Amendment and qualified immunity. A United States District court in the state of New York held that plaintiff s suit against school district would not be dismissed on the basis of: (1) qualified immunity due to the fact that the court could not determine whether school officials could have reasonably believed they were not infringing on student s First Amendment freedoms; and (2) the school district was not an arm of the state, and thus not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. 3

16 Compensation and Benefits: Teacher Aid s Back Injury Was Work Related Wyble v. Acadiana Preparatory School (La. App. 3 Cir., 956 So. 2d 722), May 2, Ms Wyble was employed as a teacher s aid in the Acadiana Preparatory School in Opelousas, Louisiana. On October 21, 2004, and October 22, 2004, she lifted a heavy desk onto a rug and helped push the desk across the classroom as a component of the reasonable expectations related to her assigned duties as a teacher s aid. As a result of these actions, she suffered a degree of stiffness in her lower back that evening and the next morning. On the next day, she experienced immediate pain when she straightened up from bending over a low-to-the-ground, child-sized table while working on an art project with her students. Soon thereafter, she reported the pain in her back to the teacher with whom she was working. Afterward, she informed the administrator of the school of her injury, and that she was going to seek medical attention. After a visit to her family physician, she was referred for additional tests and evaluation pertaining to her medical condition. The plaintiff s MRI revealed a right-sided disc herniation at L 4-5, right paracentral disc protrusion/herniation, and facet joint hyperthropy in the lower lumbar region. Plaintiff requested that the school pay for her medical expenses, and was informed that the school was not responsible for the injury and would not pay any benefits to her or on her behalf. The Office of Workers Compensation, District 02, St. Landry Parish, awarded plaintiff weekly benefits, medical expenses, and attorney fees. Thereupon, employer appealed. A Louisiana court of appeals ruled that: (1) evidence supported finding that plaintiff suffered accident at work; (2) evidence supported finding that plaintiff s back injury was aggravated by a work-related accident; (3) evidenced supported the awarding of penalties and attorney s fees; and (4) plaintiff was entitled to $5,000 in additional attorney fees for work performed on appeal. Disabled Students: Disabled Student Attacked During Lunch Green v. San Diego Unified School Dist. (C. A. 9 {Cal.}, 226 Fed. App. 677), March 16, School district and school officials did not act with deliberate indifference towards disabled black student who was attacked by classmates at lunch, as required to bring action under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). School officials knew that student had been teased by classmates, and that several unrelated acts of violence had occurred on campus. Since this information did not create a substantial likelihood that the student would be attacked, and there was no evidence that school officials unreasonably or inadequately responded to the student s reports, the case was dismissed. 4

17 Labor and Employment: Teacher with Breast Cancer Was Not Insubordinate Brawner v. Marietta City Bd. of Educ. (Ga. App., 646 S. E. 2d 89), March 28, Dr. Sharon Brawner, an elementary school teacher, was terminated after she attended a pre-planning day at her school while she was on extended long-term disability leave because of treatment and complications from cancer. Upon recommendation of the superintendent, the school board terminated the teacher s employment on good and sufficient cause, and for insubordination for returning to work without the required fitness-for-duty report signed by a physician. The Court of Appeals of Georgia held that evidence was insufficient to support school board s finding of insubordination, based on teacher s alleged failure to provide a fitness for duty report before she was restored to duty. Note: The teacher attended part of the first day of a pre-planning session held at her elementary school, where she signed an attendance roster, attended a staff meeting, and introduced herself to the new principal after the meeting. She had gotten approval from her physician to attend the session for one day, if she sat down and did very little except listen to her principal and check her classroom. She was on extended leave until December 31 of that school year. Coach s Failure to Attend Summer Workouts Constituted Non-Renewal Smith v. Petal School Dist. (Miss. App., 956 So. 2d 273), September 19, Plaintiff was employed as a physical education teacher and coach at Petal High School (Petal, Mississippi) for the school year. His coaching duties spanned the entire calendar (i. e. 12 month) year, including the summer months. The reason for the plaintiff s nonrenewal was his failure to attend summer workouts for the football team. The Court of Appeals of Mississippi held that the teacher/coach s failure to perform his duties required in coaching rider by neglecting to attend eight of the 24 summer football workouts provided a sufficient basis not to renew the teacher s contract. The rider on the teacher s contract referred to the single position of teacher/coach. 5

18 School District Not Negligent for Hiring or Retention of Teacher Doe ex rel. Brown v. Pontotoc County School Dist. (Miss. App., 957 So. 2d 410), May 15, At the time of the case, Jeremy Wise was a high school math teacher and baseball coach. In addition, he had a wife (also a teacher), a two-year-old daughter; and, his wife was pregnant with their second child. Wise s relationship with the 14-year-old female (Jane) began as the student s teacher, family friend, and mentor, all with the endorsement of the student s family. It was not unusual to see them together at the girl s home, at church, at school, or attending extra-curricular activities at school. Throughout the spring and summer of 2002, there were five instances of undisputed physical contact (hugging, rubbing shoulders, fondling, laying in a bed, and kissing) between Wise and Jane; but no sexual intercourse occurred. Once Jane s family learned of the relationship, they attempted to have criminal charges issued against Wise; however, the grand jury did not return an indictment. On February 11, 2003, they filed civil action against the school district. The Court of Appeals of Mississippi held that the school district did not have either actual or constructive notice of the alleged inappropriate relationship between the student and teacher, as required to establish a claim for negligent hiring or retention. Furthermore, the Court stated that the unsubstantiated rumor about the teacher s inappropriate relationship with the student was insufficient to trigger the school district s duty to report the alleged abuse. 6

19 Security: School Was Not Liable for Student s Assault Bowman v. Williamson County Bd. of Educ. (M. D. Tenn., 488 F. Supp. 2d 679), May 18, In October 2005, a black student (Devlin) who was two years older than plaintiff s son (Luke), threatened Luke on the school bus. Subsequently, Luke, who is white, became the target of other offensive behaviors by other black students. On November 30, 2005, several black students, including Devlin, committed battery on Luke s person. Devlin was subsequently arrested for assault (hitting Luke in the face), suspended from school, and sent to an alternative school for 30 days. School officials were not aware of any confrontation between the two students prior to this incident. Following the November 30, 2005 incident, Luke s mother had him placed on homebound services, during which he did not attend classes at his assigned school for the remainder of the fall semester. At some point during the time while Luke was on homebound services, he or his mother received hang-up phone calls that originated from Devlin s house (according to caller identification). After Luke returned to school in January 2006, plaintiff informed the vice principal that people were making fun of Luke. The vice principal investigated the matter, interviewing each of the students identified and named by Luke. After Devlin returned to school, he either rubbed his hands together or shook Luke s hand on the school bus. Vice principal discussed the incident with both boys. Devlin stated that the hand rubbing had no meaning and that he had no problem with Luke. Vice principal told Luke to report immediately any other bullying or harassment problems to him. A United States District Court in Tennessee stated that the school district was not liable under due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution for injury to student, inflicted by fellow student, on grounds that there was a special relationship between school and student whose liberties were restrained. In addition, school officials took no affirmative action increasing the risk to student assaulted by fellow student, as required for state to create a danger exception to the general legal principle related to protection from a third party s conduct. Student Voluntarily Participated in Fight Williams v. City of New York (N. Y. A. D. 2 Dept., 837 N. Y. S. 2d 300), June 5, The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, held that elementary school student allegedly injured in a fight with another student in school s auditorium was a voluntary participant in the fight. Thus, any alleged inadequacy of supervision could not be considered a cause of the student s injuries as required for imposition of liability in her personal injury suit. In addition, the Court went on to state that school are not insurers of the safety of students, for they cannot reasonably be expected to supervise and control continuously all of the students movements and activities. 7

20 Student Discipline: First Amendment Did Not Bar Student From Disciplinary Action for Leaving Campus Corales v. Bennett (C. D. Cal., 488 F. Supp. 2d 975), May 21, On Tuesday, March 28, 2006, Anthony and three other middle school students left school after their first period class, without the prior permission or supervision of their parents or school authorities. It was their intent to walk to the high school and to participate in a protest pertaining to immigration reform; however, they found that the high school was on lockdown. Two days later, on Thursday, March 30, 2006, the assistant principal called the four students into his office after he learned of their absences from another student. He gave the students a stern lecture regarding their unexcused absences, and assigned them punishment. This consisted of all four students being precluded from attending an end-of-the-year school trip to an amusement park or dance. After the meeting with the assistant principal, all four students went back to their classes. At the end of the school day, Anthony went home and telephoned his mother to tell her he had gotten into trouble at school and had lost his end-of-the-year privileges. When Anthony s mother arrived home, she found that Anthony had attempted suicide by shooting himself in the head with a rifle. Anthony was pronounced brain dead the same day; however, he was kept on life-support equipment until donation of his organs could be arranged on April 1, Anthony left behind a suicide note that expressed regret to, and his love for, his family and friends. He apologized to his father for making him mad, and that he killed himself because he had too many problems. In addition, he expressed contempt for the assistant principal (Bennett). Furthermore, he gave instructions to tell Mr. Bennett he is a A United States district court in California held that school officials, including Bennett, did not violate students First Amendment by disciplining them for leaving campus to participate in a protest, because their First Amendment rights were outweighed by the need for school officials to ensure the safety of the students; there was no intentional infliction of emotional distress due to the lecture to the students by the assistant principal; and the student s suicide was an unforeseen event, thus precluding any negligence claim. 8

ARIZONA CENTER FOR DISABILITY LAW A SELF-ADVOCACY GUIDE What to Do if Your Child is: Restrained, Secluded, Bullied, Harassed, Abused or Neglected at School KNOW YOUR RIGHTS 5025 East Washington Street,

Montana Elder and Persons With Developmental Disabilities Abuse Prevention Act 52-3-801. Short title. This part may be cited as the "Montana Elder and Persons With Developmental Disabilities Abuse Prevention

The In s and Out s of School Law: What You Need to Know Dr. Lee Banton, Professor Emeritus The very first act of a teacher is signing a legal document the contract! Read, study and understand the contract

Students BP 5141.4(a) CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION & REPORTING The Governing Board is committed to supporting the safety and well-being of district students and desires to facilitate the prevention of and response

Acalanes Union HSD Board Policy Child Abuse Prevention And Reporting BP 5141.4 Students Child Abuse Reporting The Board recognizes that child abuse has severe consequences and that the district has a responsibility

POLICY #414 MANDATED REPORTING OF CHILD NEGLECT OR PHYSICAL OR SEXUAL ABUSE I. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to make clear the statutory requirements of school personnel to report suspected child

The Arizona State Hospital The Arizona State Hospital is the only long-term inpatient psychiatric facility in Arizona. Before ordering that you receive treatment at the Arizona State Hospital, the court

APPENDIX C HARASSMENT, BULLYING, DISCRIMINATION, AND HATE CRIMES (Adaptedfrom the Attorney General's Safe Schools initiative) This section of the Code of Conduct has been adapted from the Greenfield Public

500 Yam hill Plaza Building 815 S.W. Second Avenue Portland, Oregon 97204 Phone: (503) 1-1792 Fax: (503) 1516 Of Attorneys for Plaintiff IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON ADALBERTO

JAMES W. JOHNSTON ATTORNEY AT LAW 00 S. Flower Street, Suite 00 Los Angeles, California 001 State Bar No. (1) 1- Attorney for Plaintiff IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234 OFFICE OF STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES 89 Washington Avenue, Room 318-M EB Phone: (518) 486-6090; Fax: (518) 474-8299

Subject: SECURITY IN THE SCHOOLS Page: 1 of 1 SUMMARY OF CHANGES This regulation supersedes A-412 dated September 13, 2005. It sets forth the reporting and notification requirements that school officials

LEADING QUESTIONS Student Suicide: Could You Be Held Liable? Suicide among students is tragic, and litigation against schools that might have prevented such tragedies is on the rise. How can principals

Journalism 1 Review Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (1969) Issue: Freedom of Speech at School Bottom Line: You Have the Right To Express Yourself Up to a Point Background In December 1965,

I. PURPOSE 414 MANDATED REPORTING OF CHILD NEGLECT OR PHYSICAL OR SEXUAL ABUSE The purpose of this policy is to make clear the statutory requirements of school personnel to report suspected child neglect

BP 5131(a) CONDUCT The County Board of Education believes that all students have the right to be educated in a positive learning environment free from disruptions. Students shall be expected to exhibit

DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE 1. Purpose and Scope 1.1 The Company s procedure is designed to help and encourage all workers to achieve and maintain standards of conduct, attendance and job performance. The Company

MODEL POLICY REPORTING CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT FOR SCHOOL OFFICIALS IN DUPAGE COUNTY The DuPage County State s Attorney s Office, the DuPage Regional Superintendent of Schools, the School District, the

SCHOOL LAW STUDY GUIDE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE MICHAEL D. EISNER COLLEGE OF EDUCATION EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP & POLICY STUDIES US CONSTITUTION General Welfare Clause is found in the preamble

SCHOOL LAW STUDY GUIDE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE MICHAEL D. EISNER COLLEGE OF EDUCATION EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP & POLICY STUDIES US CONSTITUTION General Welfare Clause is found in the preamble

General District Courts To Understand Your Visit to Court You Should Know: It is the courts wish that you know your rights and duties. We want every person who comes here to receive fair treatment in accordance

DRAFT BP 5131(a) ABC UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board Policy STUDENTS CONDUCT The Board of Trustees believes that all students have the right to be educated in a positive learning environment free from disruptions.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION WALTER ALLEN ROTHGERY, v. Plaintiff, GILLESPIE COUNTY, TEXAS, Defendant. Cause No. ORIGINAL COMPLAINT Plaintiff Walter Allen

Students BP 5141.4 CHILD ABUSE REPORTING PROCEDURES The Board of Trustees recognizes that the district has a responsibility to protect students by facilitating the prompt reporting of known and suspected

Patient s Bill of Rights When you apply for or receive mental health services in the State of Texas, you have many rights. Your most important rights are listed on these six pages. These rights apply to

CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT POLICY P-5137 SAFE AND RESPECTFUL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT: BULLYING AND CYBERBULLYING I. Introduction The Clark County School District is committed to providing a safe, secure,

CHILD ABUSE REPORTING PROCEDURES BP 5141.4 The Governing Board recognizes that the district has a responsibility to protect students by facilitating the prompt reporting of known and suspected incidents

Students BP 5141.4 (a) CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION AND REPORTING Child Abuse Prevention The Governing Board recognizes the district's responsibility to educate students about the dangers of child abuse so that

Chapter 5 Civil Law and Procedure Business Law Ms. Turner Crime Offense against society Tort Private or civil wrong; offense against an individual Can sue to receive money damages Can be both a crime and

Chapter Five CRIMINAL LAW AND VICTIMS RIGHTS In a criminal case, a prosecuting attorney (working for the city, state, or federal government) decides if charges should be brought against the perpetrator.

Franklin Technology Center s Code of Conduct Franklin Technology Center is comprised of students, faculty, staff and administrators. This community recognizes the need to establish a code of conduct that

ENROLLED Regular Session, 1997 HOUSE BILL NO. 2412 BY REPRESENTATIVE JACK SMITH AN ACT To enact Chapter 33 of Title 13 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950, comprised of R.S. 13:5301 through 5304,

SEXUAL ASSAULT POLICY California State University, Stanislaus is strongly committed to the establishment of an educational environment in which students, faculty, and staff can work together in an atmosphere

1. Scope and Purpose NEWMAN UNIVERSITY DISCIPLINARY POLICY AND PROCEDURE 1.1 Newman University [hereafter referred to as the University] recognises disciplinary rules and procedures are necessary for the

MANDATED REPORTING OF CHILD NEGLECT OR PHYSICAL OR SEXUAL ABUSE I. PURPOSE The purpose of this policy is to make clear the statutory requirements of school personnel to report suspected child neglect or

POLICY TITLE: Student Drug, Alcohol and Tobacco Use ABERDEEN SCHOOL DISTRICT #58 POLICY NO: 551 PAGE 1 of 5 PHILOSOPHY It is the Idaho Legislature s intent that parental involvement in all aspects of a

ANN ARBOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS TITLE IX GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES PURPOSE: The purpose of these procedures is to secure, at the lowest possible level, prompt and equitable resolutions of complaints based on sex discrimination,

MANAGING THE RISKS POSED BY THE THREE PUBLIC POLICY WRONGFUL DISCHARGE CASES RECENTLY DECIDED BY THE MISSOURI SUPREME COURT By: Gerald M. Richardson I. An At Will Employee Can Sue His Employer on a Claim

The Arizona State Hospital The Arizona State Hospital is the only long-term inpatient psychiatric facility in Arizona. Before ordering that you receive treatment at the Arizona State Hospital, the court

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? A guide to the NORTH DAKOTA CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES This guide is made available by NORTH DAKOTA CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES North Dakota Department of Human

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN FLORIDA The Petitioner may go to court on his/her own (without an attorney) to petition for an injunction to protect him/her against domestic violence (assault or battery by your spouse

HARTFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS DISTRICT SAFE SCHOOL CLIMATE PLAN The Hartford Public Schools Board of Education is committed to creating and maintaining a physically, emotionally, and intellectually safe educational

ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address): TELEPHONE NO.: FAX NO. (Optional): E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional): ATTORNEY FOR (Name): SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SHORT

Community Legal Information Association of PEI, Inc. Sexual Assault As an adult in Canada, you have the right to choose when or if you engage in sexual activity. Sexual activity without your consent is

Mandatory Arrest Checklist: Sec. 968.075, Wis. Stats. The following document was prepared in 1989, by the Appleton Police Department, and updated by the Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence, in

: Minnesota Criminal Code - Chapter 609 Overview This chapter provides an overview of Minnesota s Criminal Code, Chapter 609 of Minnesota Statutes, to help you recognize the most common types of criminal

Case 5:14-cv-00631 Document 1 Filed 07/11/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION CAROLE RIELEY Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:14 cv 00631

Protection of Minors Vanderbilt University Policies and Procedures Effective Date: 4-1-2013 1 Policy 1 Vanderbilt University is dedicated to the welfare and safety of Minors who visit Vanderbilt s campus,